A strategy useful for duping fools is to create a statistic out of thin air and repeat it until it is accepted as fact. After all, as a Founding Father of modern liberalism said, “A lie told often enough becomes the truth.” One such lie is the preposterous but incessantly repeated assertion that 97% of the scientists of the world agree with the Obama Regime’s radical position on man-made global warming — or as they have been calling it since it stopped getting warmer, “climate change.”

An actual scientist, Roy Spencer of the University of Alabama, teamed up with Joseph Bast of the Heartland Institute to get to the bottom of where this 97% figure comes from. Apparently it is loosely based on various ideologically driven studies that made not even a token effort to achieve scientific vigor, but simply cherry-picked sympathetic scientists, many of whom had likely been pressured or bribed with government funding into backing the hoax. The view that human carbon emissions might conceivably contribute to warmer temperatures although this is not necessarily a bad thing is stretched into endorsement of the Regime’s apocalyptic hysteria, while dissenters are simply ignored.

It would be easier to invent a statistic proving that most scientists say global warming is a lie. As Bast and Spencer observe,

Surveys of meteorologists repeatedly find a majority oppose the alleged consensus. Only 39.5% of 1,854 American Meteorological Society members who responded to a survey in 2012 said man-made global warming is dangerous. …

Of the various petitions on global warming circulated for signatures by scientists, the one by the Petition Project, a group of physicists and physical chemists based in La Jolla, Calif., has by far the most signatures—more than 31,000 (more than 9,000 with a Ph.D.). It was most recently published in 2009, and most signers were added or reaffirmed since 2007. The petition states that “there is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of . . . carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate.”

We could go on, but the larger point is plain. There is no basis for the claim that 97% of scientists believe that man-made climate change is a dangerous problem.

But maybe if Obama, Kerry, the political flunkies who have replaced the great scientists who used to staff NASA, and the Democrat apparatchiks who run the media just repeat the lie a few thousand more times, it will magically become true, just like Lenin promised.

A more certain result is that all but the most obstinately clueless will figure out that nothing Obama et al. have to say should be believed.

Dave Blount: Only 39.5% of 1,854 American Meteorological Society members who responded to a survey in 2012 said man-made global warming is dangerous.

That majority of members of the American Meteorological Society are not scientists.

Dave Blount: Of the various petitions on global warming circulated for signatures by scientists, the one by the Petition Project, a group of physicists and physical chemists based in La Jolla, Calif., has by far the most signatures—more than 31,000 (more than 9,000 with a Ph.D.).

It’s not a group of physicists or physical chemists, but people who claim to have at least an undergraduate degree in any field.

Dave Blount: Only 39.5% of 1,854 American Meteorological Society members who responded to a survey in 2012 said man-made global warming is dangerous.

That majority of members of the American Meteorological Society are not scientists.

Dave Blount: Of the various petitions on global warming circulated for signatures by scientists, the one by the Petition Project, a group of physicists and physical chemists based in La Jolla, Calif., has by far the most signatures—more than 31,000 (more than 9,000 with a Ph.D.).

It’s not a group of physicists or physical chemists, but people who claim to have at least an undergraduate degree in any field.

First, the graphic starts out with a typo. It’s Doran. Second, one doesn’t simply add people from a petition that includes many non-scientists to the results of a survey of scientists. Most important, the scientists in Doran-Zimmerman constituting the 97% were climate scientists who primarily publish in the field of climate science.

First, the graphic starts out with a typo. It’s Doran. Second, one doesn’t simply add people from a petition that includes many non-scientists to the results of a survey of scientists. Most important, the scientists in Doran-Zimmerman constituting the 97% were climate scientists who primarily publish in the field of climate science.

There is a better takedown at Watts Up With That. 97% believe that there is at least a little anthropogenic climate change. Nowhere in that number is a record of what percentage think it is large or serious. I am entirely willing to grant that there might be some – humans have been changing the environments locally for millennia, and if Ruddiman is right, even globally on a limited basis for an equal length of time. (Otherwise we would be in an Ice Age now, he claims.) But I have seem no evidence that is even mildly persuasive that we are on the road to catastrophe. There are even the interesting counterclaims, just gaining steam, that a little warming might be a net boon, but we might not get it because we are actually moving into a cooling trend. I do not contend that either of those are “settled science.” But there is a least some evidence for both.

There is a better takedown at Watts Up With That. 97% believe that there is at least a little anthropogenic climate change. Nowhere in that number is a record of what percentage think it is large or serious. I am entirely willing to grant that there might be some – humans have been changing the environments locally for millennia, and if Ruddiman is right, even globally on a limited basis for an equal length of time. (Otherwise we would be in an Ice Age now, he claims.) But I have seem no evidence that is even mildly persuasive that we are on the road to catastrophe. There are even the interesting counterclaims, just gaining steam, that a little warming might be a net boon, but we might not get it because we are actually moving into a cooling trend. I do not contend that either of those are “settled science.” But there is a least some evidence for both.

As for your cartoon, climate change is a significant and lasting change in weather patterns. Global warming is a change in the Earth’s mean temperature. They mean different things, and both terms have been used for decades.

As for your cartoon, climate change is a significant and lasting change in weather patterns. Global warming is a change in the Earth’s mean temperature. They mean different things, and both terms have been used for decades.

Glazi: “That majority of members of the American Meteorological Society are not scientists.” is a statement based more upon subjective belief than fact.

Not at all. While one doesn’t have to hold a PhD to be a scientist, in the modern world, nearly all scientists begin their careers by earning a PhD. Only a third of the signatories claim to have PhDs. Only about 12% claim to have PhDs in a field closely related to climate science.

Doran & Zimmerman found that 97% of scientists actively publishing primarily in the field of climate science support the consensus concerning anthropogenic climate change. They also found that this support decreased among those with less specialized training in climate science. Other surveys show support is least among laypersons.

Glazi: “That majority of members of the American Meteorological Society are not scientists.” is a statement based more upon subjective belief than fact.

Not at all. While one doesn’t have to hold a PhD to be a scientist, in the modern world, nearly all scientists begin their careers by earning a PhD. Only a third of the signatories claim to have PhDs. Only about 12% claim to have PhDs in a field closely related to climate science.

Doran & Zimmerman found that 97% of scientists actively publishing primarily in the field of climate science support the consensus concerning anthropogenic climate change. They also found that this support decreased among those with less specialized training in climate science. Other surveys show support is least among laypersons.